site contamination - regulatory and orphan site management ... · site contamination is an...

Environment Protection Authority

Site contamination

Regulatory and orphan site management framework

ttan

Line

ttan

Line

Site contamination – Regulatory and orphan site management framework

For further information please contact:

Information Officer Environment Protection Authority GPO Box 2607 Adelaide SA 5001

Telephone: (08) 8204 2004 Facsimile: (08) 8124 4670 Free call (country): 1800 623 445

Website: <www.epa.sa.gov.au>

Email: <[email protected]>

ISBN 978-1-921495-72-4

July 2017

Disclaimer

This publication is a guide only and does not necessarily provide adequate information in relation to every situation. This publication seeks to explain your possible obligations in a helpful and accessible way. In doing so, however, some detail may not be captured. It is important, therefore, that you seek information from the EPA itself regarding your possible obligations and, where appropriate, that you seek your own legal advice.

© Environment Protection Authority

This document may be reproduced in whole or part for the purpose of study or training, subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgment of the source and to it not being used for commercial purposes or sale. Reproduction for purposes other than those given above requires the prior written permission of the Environment Protection Authority.

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/

mailto:[email protected]

Contents Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................................................................1

Summary ..............................................................................................................................................................................3

1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................................................5

1.1 Site contamination ...............................................................................................................................................5

1.2 Purpose ...............................................................................................................................................................5

1.3 The EP Act ..........................................................................................................................................................5

1.4 Objectives............................................................................................................................................................6

1.5 Non-derogation....................................................................................................................................................6

1.6 EPA regulatory principles ....................................................................................................................................6

1.7 The ASC NEPM...................................................................................................................................................7

1.8 The role of SA Health ..........................................................................................................................................7

1.9 Application of the framework to EPA licenced sites ............................................................................................8

1.10 Application of the framework to mining leases ....................................................................................................8

1.11 Liable and appropriate persons ...........................................................................................................................8

1.12 Contesting EPA decisions ...................................................................................................................................9

1.13 Review of the framework .....................................................................................................................................9

2 Provision of information to the EPA .........................................................................................................................12

2.1 Overview............................................................................................................................................................12

2.2 Section 83A notifications ...................................................................................................................................12

2.3 Section 83 notifications......................................................................................................................................14

2.4 Site contamination reports.................................................................................................................................14

2.5 Site contamination audit reports ........................................................................................................................16

2.6 Reporting timeframes ........................................................................................................................................16

3 EPA assessment and remediation goals..................................................................................................................17

3.1 EPA assessment goals......................................................................................................................................17

3.2 EPA remediation goals ......................................................................................................................................18

4 Regulatory decision notices......................................................................................................................................19

5 Overview ......................................................................................................................................................................21

6 Determination of person(s) liable for site contamination .......................................................................................22

7 Regulatory priority......................................................................................................................................................23

7.1 Overview............................................................................................................................................................23

7.2 Potentially contaminating activity ranking..........................................................................................................23

7.3 Determination of exposure pathways ................................................................................................................24

7.4 Potential exposure pathways − human health...................................................................................................24

7.5 Potential exposure pathways − water and environment ....................................................................................24

7.6 Determination of regulatory priority ...................................................................................................................24

8 Response to regulatory priority determination........................................................................................................26

9 Triggers for a site contamination audit ....................................................................................................................27

10 Non-statutory agreements .........................................................................................................................................29

10.1 Overview............................................................................................................................................................29

10.2 Engaging in non-statutory agreements..............................................................................................................29

11 Voluntary proposals ...................................................................................................................................................33

11.1 Overview............................................................................................................................................................33

11.2 Triggers for voluntary proposals ........................................................................................................................33

11.3 Engaging in and varying voluntary proposals....................................................................................................34

11.4 Variation of an agreed voluntary proposal .........................................................................................................36

11.5 Delay events......................................................................................................................................................36

11.6 Completion of an agreed voluntary proposal.....................................................................................................36

11.7 Failure to meet the objectives of a voluntary proposal ......................................................................................37

12 Orders ..........................................................................................................................................................................38

12.1 Site contamination assessment and site remediation orders ............................................................................38

12.2 Issuing orders ....................................................................................................................................................38

13 Non-compliance ..........................................................................................................................................................40

13.1 Overview............................................................................................................................................................40

13.2 Persons considered to be non-complying .........................................................................................................40

13.3 Managing non-compliance for assessment and remediation ............................................................................40

13.4 Show cause letters ............................................................................................................................................41

13.5 Warning letters ..................................................................................................................................................42

13.6 Civil penalties and prosecution..........................................................................................................................42

14 Site management plans and cessation of regulatory involvement........................................................................44

15 Site management plans..............................................................................................................................................45

16 Cessation of regulatory involvement........................................................................................................................46

16.1 Overview............................................................................................................................................................46

16.2 Regulatory endpoint through the site contamination audit process...................................................................46

16.3 General regulatory endpoint ..............................................................................................................................46

17 Orphan site contamination ........................................................................................................................................48

17.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................................................48

17.2 Orphan site identification ...................................................................................................................................48

17.3 Exceptional circumstances policy......................................................................................................................49

18 Decision framework and governance .......................................................................................................................50

18.1 Overview............................................................................................................................................................50

18.2 Stage 1: Initial risk assessment and prioritisation..............................................................................................50

18.3 Stage 2: Detailed assessment...........................................................................................................................50

18.4 Stage 3: Mitigation.............................................................................................................................................51

19 Prioritisation of an orphan site..................................................................................................................................52

19.1 Overview............................................................................................................................................................52

19.2 Potential public health risk due to groundwater use ..........................................................................................52

19.3 Potential public health risk due to vapour intrusion ...........................................................................................53

19.4 Determination of orphan site priority..................................................................................................................54

Appendix 1 Voluntary proposal template...................................................................................................................59

Appendix 2 Regulatory decision notice template......................................................................................................63

Appendix 3 – Potentially Contaminating Activity ranking.............................................................................................65

List of figures Figure 1 General framework process ................................................................................................................................3

Figure 2 Processing of S83A notifications .......................................................................................................................13

Figure 3 Processing of site contamination reports...........................................................................................................15

Figure 4 EPA assessment goals......................................................................................................................................17

Figure 5 EPA remediation goals ......................................................................................................................................18

Figure 6 Site classification process .................................................................................................................................21

Figure 7 Regulatory priority process................................................................................................................................23

Figure 8 Determination of regulatory priority ...................................................................................................................25

Figure 9 Process for engaging in non-statutory agreements...........................................................................................29

Figure 10 Determination of when the EPA will use a statutory or non-statutory agreement .............................................33

Figure 11 Process for engaging in statutory agreements ..................................................................................................34

Figure 12 Iterative development of a voluntary proposal...................................................................................................35

Figure 13 Determination of regulatory action for non-complying persons .........................................................................41

List of tables Table 1 Reporting timeframes ........................................................................................................................................16

Table 2 Regulatory priority matrix relating to human health ...........................................................................................25

Table 3 Regulatory priority matrix relating to environmental harm .................................................................................25

Table 4 Response to regulatory priority determination...................................................................................................26

Table 5 Groundwater risk value determination...............................................................................................................53

Table 6 Risk level associated with sum of risk numbers for groundwater ......................................................................53

Table 7 Vapour risk value determination ........................................................................................................................54

Table 8 Risk level associated with sum of risk numbers for vapour ...............................................................................54

Table 9 EPA action level based on the cumulative groundwater and vapour risk..........................................................55

Abbreviations

ASC NEPM National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999 (as amended 2013)

EP Act Environment Protection Act 1993 (South Australia)

EPA South Australian Environment Protection Authority

GAR Guidelines for the assessment and remediation of groundwater contamination (2009)1

GENI General Environmental Information System (EPA database)

IOP internal operating procedure

NEPM see ASC NEPM

PCA potentially contaminating activity (Environment Protection Regulations 2009, regulation 50)

RDN regulatory decision notice

SCAO site contamination assessment order

SMP site management plan

SRO site remediation order

S83 section 83 (of the EP Act)

S83A section 83A (of the EP Act)

VSCAP voluntary site contamination assessment proposal2

VSRP voluntary site remediation proposal3

WTA Working Together Agreement for Site Contamination: Between the Environment Protection Authority and SA Health (2015)

1 Or any subsequent revisions of this document 2 Pursuant to section 103I of the Environment Protection Act 1993 3 Pursuant to section 103K of the Environment Protection Act 1993

1

Summary This framework details the process the EPA generally uses to regulate and progress site contamination towards a point at which a site:

• is deemed suitable for its current or proposed use, and/or

• does not pose a risk to human health or the environment.

The framework also includes provisions for the prioritisation and assessment of ‘orphan sites’ when they are managed by

the government.

The general framework process is detailed in Figure 1.

Figure 1 General framework process

3

1


Introduction 1.1 Site contamination

Site contamination is generally historic in nature. South Australia, like other urbanised communities in the world, manages site contamination issues that are the direct result of past practices.

‘Site contamination4’ is defined within the Environment Protection Act 1993 (EP Act)5 and is most often caused by:

• petrols, oils, solvents, degreasers and other substances used in manufacturing

• industrial sites such as gasworks, dry cleaners, timber preservation and tanneries

• agricultural chemicals pesticides and termiticides

• waste products, which were often buried.

Site contamination is often detected during assessment required as part of the planning approval process associated with the subdivision, development or redevelopment of land.

The EP Act establishes a legislative framework for the management of site contamination.

Dealing with the legacy of site contamination and managing its impacts can be a complex and challenging issue. Only suitably qualified and experienced persons should undertake assessment and remediation.

Every situation is different. When chemical substances associated with potentially contaminating activities (PCA) are found, site-specific assessments should be undertaken to determine the nature, extent and level of risk associated with each case. Following assessment remediation may be necessary to treat, contain, remove or manage the contamination to eliminate or prevent the risk or potential risk of exposure.

Site contamination is an important environmental, health, economic and planning issue and can have implications for land owners and occupiers, developers, councils, planning authorities, government and local communities.

Management of site contamination requires a strong, focused and coordinated approach to achieve the best outcome for the community and the environment. If not managed appropriately, site contamination has the potential to adversely affect human health and the environment.

1.2 Purpose

This framework has been developed to describe the way in which the EPA:

• administers and enforces Part 10A and the associated site contamination provisions of the EP Act (Parts 1 to 6)

• identifies, prioritises and manages site contamination when liable persons cannot be reasonably identified or practicably undertake required assessment and/or remediation (Part 7).

1.3 The EP Act

The framework has been developed in accordance, and is consistent, with the provisions and objects of the EP Act.

4 Section 5B – site contamination 5 https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/ENVIRONMENT%20PROTECTION%20ACT%201993.aspx

5

https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/ENVIRONMENT%20PROTECTION%20ACT%201993.aspx


1.4 Objectives

The framework has been prepared primarily for use by the EPA. However, it is made available publicly to provide transparency and predictability to interested persons.

The objectives, with respect to the regulation of site contamination, are to ensure that:

• any risk to human health or the environment, posed by site contamination, is regulated by the EPA in a timely and consistent manner

• regulation of site contamination is proportionate to the potential risk posed to human health and/or the environment

• the processes used by the EPA to regulate site contamination are transparent and predictable.

The objectives, for the management of orphan sites, are to ensure that:

• the highest potential public health risk posed by the site contamination is addressed as a priority

• the EPA has clear processes to identify orphan site contamination

• the process used by the EPA to prioritise the assessment and/or remediation of orphan site contamination is consistent and transparent.

1.5 Non-derogation

The framework is not legally binding. Nothing in this document is intended to derogate from or fetter the powers of the EPA and authorised officers under the EP Act and the regulations made under that Act. It is intended to be used as a guide only and will be suitable for most scenarios, providing a predictable regulatory response. However, there will be occasions when the EPA will respond differently to the guidance provided in the framework. In this instance the EPA will provide clear explanation as to why the regulatory response has varied.

1.6 EPA regulatory principles6

As South Australia’s leading environmental regulator, the EPA employs best practice regulatory principles and tools, and robust processes to:

• support and enable those willing to comply or go beyond compliance

• tackle the important environmental issues with a proportionate, risk- and evidence-based approach

• withstand challenges

• take decisive, timely and strong enforcement action when needed.

Much of this is achieved by providing advice and guidance, partnering with other organisations, in education and regulation. However, in some circumstances, the EPA will use the provisions of the EP Act to ensure compliance.

The regulatory approach is based on the foundation of firm and fair compliance and enforcement, and is guided by the following core principles for regulation.

Proportional

The EPA will ensure that any measure taken is proportional to the risks posed to the environment and the seriousness of the offence. As far as the law allows, the EPA will take into account the circumstances of each case when considering the action it will take.

www.epa.sa.gov.au/our_work/compliance_and_enforcement

6

6

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/our_work/compliance_and_enforcement


Consistent

The EPA will be fair, equitable and apply consistent processes in all cases. It will ensure all officers are trained and there are effective systems and operational policies in place to support them.

Transparent

The EPA will openly share information about its decisions and actions. The organisation and its officers will assist the regulated community with understanding what is required of them and what they should expect from the EPA. It will make available information in the Public Register as required by law.

Targeted

The EPA will ensure its regulatory effort is directed primarily towards those activities that pose the greatest risks, cause the greatest environmental damage or undermine the regulatory regime.

Timely

The EPA will work in a timely manner to manage, inform and progress without delay.

Balanced and principled use of compliance and enforcement tools will ensure the EPA’s actions are consistent, fair and effective, providing assurance to the community that it is working to fulfil its role of protecting the environment.

The EPA appreciates the commitment of liable parties in managing site contamination and is continually seeking to make its processes easier to understand. The EPA is committed to continuously reviewing the regulatory framework to identify areas for improvement and continue to provide environmental protection as well as streamlined and cost-effective regulation.

1.7 The ASC NEPM

Where relevant, the processes in the framework have been developed to be consistent with the National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure 1999 (amended 2013) or ASC NEPM7.

The ASC NEPM provides a national risk-based approach for the staged or tiered assessment of site contamination in Australia. Information collected at each stage or tier of assessment is used to inform and plan the scope of subsequent work. The framework provides the means for prioritising work and focusing on higher risk site contamination issues using the ASC NEPM’s tiered approach.

The purpose of the ASC NEPM is to establish a nationally consistent approach for the assessment of site contamination. The ASC NEPM’s approach promotes sound environmental management practices that should be adopted by the community including regulators, site assessors, consultants, auditors, land-owners, developers and industry parties.

The desired outcome is to provide adequate protection of human health and the environment where contamination has occurred, through the development of an efficient and effective national approach to the assessment of site contamination.

1.8 The role of SA Health

The EPA and SA Health have prepared a Working Together Agreement for Site Contamination 2015 (WTA). This document clearly details the roles of both the EPA and SA Health and the circumstances in which across-government interaction is necessary to ensure that any risk to public health is addressed in a timely and effective manner. The WTA is available on the EPA website8.

7 www.scew.gov.au/nepms/assessment-site-contamination 8 www.epa.sa.gov.au/files/11243_mou_sahealth_oct2015.pdf

7

http://www.scew.gov.au/nepms/assessment-site-contamination

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/files/11243_mou_sahealth_oct2015.pdf


1.9 Application of the framework to EPA licenced sites

The EPA grants environmental authorisations (licences) in accordance with section 40 of the EP Act. Section 45 of the EP Act allows the EPA to impose conditions of an environmental authorisation with respect to such matters as are contemplated by the Act or as the EPA considers necessary or expedient for the purposes of the Act. Section 45 also allows the EPA to vary conditions of a licence.

Section 52A of the EP Act requires the holder of the authorisation to prepare, in accordance with specified requirements and to the satisfaction of the EPA, a plan for the management and monitoring, after cessation of the activity, of any land on which the activity was carried out. The EPA guideline, Preparation and implementation of closure and post-closure plans (2016)9 details this process.

The site contamination provisions are relevant for all sites that hold an EPA licence or intend to surrender a licence. That is, all of the statutory provisions in relation to the assessment and remediation of site contamination can be used by the EPA as part of its regulation of site contamination at any site.

1.10 Application of the framework to mining leases

In seeking a mining lease or licence from the Department of Premier and Cabinet (DPC) under the provisions of the Mining Act 1971, the proponent must submit a mining lease proposal. This must include specifics about the mining operations, provide an assessment of environmental impacts, outline the management measures to limit or remedy those environmental impacts, and provide a statement about environmental outcomes expected to occur.

Following the mining lease proposal, a program for environment protection and rehabilitation must also be submitted to DPC, setting out the environmental outcomes that are expected to occur as a result of the mining operations and the criteria to be adopted to measure or demonstrate those environmental outcomes.

The provisions in section 7(4)(b) and (c) of the EP Act exclude the EPA from regulating specific wastes produced at a mine site, and in specific circumstances. The site contamination provisions cannot be excluded and will continue to apply during the life of a mine and post-mine closure. Therefore, assessment and remediation is necessary in relation to an area of land over which there is a mining lease and the lease-holder is the appropriate person with regard to site contamination.

1.11 Liable and appropriate persons

Throughout the framework, reference is made to ‘liable persons’ and ‘appropriate persons’. For the purposes of clarity, these terms are defined as follows.

Liability for site contamination is described in sections 103C - G of the EP Act. If a person (natural or body corporate) is determined to be liable for site contamination under these sections of the EP Act, that person is deemed to be the ‘liable person’ for site contamination. In other words, this person is who the EPA regulates to assess and/or remediate site contamination.

The term ‘appropriate person’ is only relevant to the issuing of site contamination assessment orders or site remediation orders. That is, the appropriate person to be issued with an order pursuant to sections 103C, F and G. In other words, this person is deemed to have liability for site contamination and, as such, is an ‘appropriate person’ to be issued with an order.

In most instances, the EPA does not issue orders to regulate site contamination and, as such, the term ‘appropriate person’ is not applicable. By using the term ‘liable person’ the EPA can refer to all persons who have liability for site contamination, including those who have been deemed to be the ‘appropriate person’ to be issued with an order.

www.epa.sa.gov.au/files/12373_guide_closure_plan.pdf

8

9


1.12 Contesting EPA decisions

If a person is not satisfied with the recommendations or advice provided by the EPA with regard to site contamination, they should contact the Manager Site Contamination.

If satisfactory resolution cannot be achieved, the person should contact the relevant EPA Director Regulation.

1.13 Review of the framework

The framework will undergo a full review 18 months from its date of publication. However, the EPA may alter processes that relate to the framework at any time prior to this time. The latest copy will be made available on the EPA website.

9


Part 1

Processing of information

11


2 Provision of information to the EPA 2.1 Overview

The EPA will typically receive information relating to site contamination when both of the following occur:

• assessment has been undertaken at a site10

• it has been determined that site contamination exists.

The triggers for undertaking assessment include, but are not limited to, the following:

• a request or requirement of the EPA

• regulatory requirements via an EPA licence condition

• planning and development requirements in accordance with the Development Act 1993

• voluntary and due diligence assessments, including those undertaken during the acquisition or divestment of land.

For further information related to the triggers for the assessment and remediation of site contamination, refer to the EPA Guideline for the assessment and remediation of groundwater contamination or any subsequent revisions of this guideline.

The EPA receives information relating to site contamination from both liable11 and non-liable persons. This information is largely received via:

• mandatory section 83A12 notifications (Section 2.2)

• mandatory section 8313 notifications (Section 2.3)

• site contamination assessment and remediation reports14 (Section 2.4)

• site contamination audit reports (Section 2.5).

The following sections detail how site contamination information is processed upon receipt, and includes the development of the regulatory decision notice.

2.2 Section 83A notifications

The requirements of a section 83A (S83A) notification are described in the EPA publication: Section 83A – Notification of site contamination that affects or threatens underground water (2008)15.

Upon receipt of a S83A notification, the EPA will follow the process detailed in Figure 2. Each major step in this process has been described as follows. It is intended that this process will be completed within four weeks of receiving a S83A notification.

10 Section 3 of the EP Act defines a site 11 Sections 103C−G of the EP Act describes persons liable for site contamination 12 Mandatory notification provision under S83A of the EP Act 13 Mandatory notification provision under S83 of the EP Act 14 Includes reports on due diligence, provided through the Development Assessment process, as a result of an EPA licence

condition, identified from a historic file review, by the Commonwealth, regulatory monitoring and testing and all others provided to the EPA as part of regulatory processes

15 Or any subsequent revisions of this document

12


Figure 2 Processing of S83A notifications

Step 1: Determination if S83A notification is complying

For the EPA to deem a S83A notification as complying:

• site contamination must exist that affects or threatens groundwater at or in the vicinity of the site

• the notification must include all required information as described in S83A(3) of the EP Act.

S83A(3) of the EP Act states that the notification must:

(a) describe the location of the site contamination sufficient to identify it

(b) include the information known to the person about the nature and extent of the site contamination.

The EPA has prepared a S83A notification template, which is available on the EPA website16.

If a S83A notification is deemed to be complying, the EPA will progress to Step 2.

In the instance that the EPA receives a S83A notification that is deemed to be non-complying or has insufficient information, the notifier may be contacted and given the opportunity to provide further evidence that supports the notification. If sufficient evidence is able to be provided, the notification will be processed as complying. The EPA may then request that the notifier reissue the notification with the additional information.

If a notifier is unable to provide sufficient clarification, a non-complying notification or insufficient information S83A letter will be issued. Non-complying S83A notifications will not be placed in the EPA Public Register.

www.epa.sa.gov.au

13

16

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/


Step 2: Classify site

Sites will be classified based on the information provided in the S83A notification and using the process described in Part 2.

Step 3: Complying S83A letter

A letter will be issued to the notifier requesting that a report supporting the details of the S83A is provided to the EPA if the notification relates to site contamination that the EPA has not:

• previously received information

• set a timeframe for the delivery of related reports.

The letter will include a timeframe within which the EPA expects the report to be submitted, based on:

• site classification

• EPA reporting timeframes described in Section 2.6.

If the S83A notification is for the purposes of providing updated information, and the EPA has previously set a timeframe for the delivery of related reports, then the complying updated information S83A letter will be issued. If a site contamination audit is being undertaken for the site, then the complying audit S83A letter will be issued. The letter will be addressed to the liable person, with a copy provided to the notifier and the site contamination auditor (if applicable).

Step 4: Public Register and notice to other relevant organisations

The details of the notification will be placed in the EPA Public Register in accordance with section 109 of the EP Act.

Other relevant organisations, such as the local council and utilities, will also be given notice of the details of the notification, primarily for work health and safety reasons.

Step 5: Regulatory decision notice

A regulatory decision notice (RDN) will be prepared using the template as detailed in Appendix 2. The site classification and other site details will be updated on the EPA internal database (GENI). Regulatory decision notices are described in Section 4.

2.3 Section 83 notifications

The EPA receives mandatory notifications of serious or material environmental harm under S83 of the EP Act. Such notifications are received for licensed17 and non-licensed sites, and illegal dumping matters.

The processing of S83 notifications is generally the same as that of S83A notifications. The key difference is that when assessing whether a notification is complying, it is assessed against the provisions as detailed in S83 and section 5 of the EP Act, rather than those in S83A.

2.4 Site contamination reports

The requirements of site contamination reporting are described in multiple sections of the GAR.

Upon the receipt of a site contamination report, the EPA will follow the process detailed in Figure 3. Each step in the process is also described in detail, as follows:

17 EPA granted environmental authorisation

14


Figure 3 Processing of site contamination reports

Step 1: Receipt and prioritisation of reports

When the EPA receives a site contamination report, it will be noted on the site contamination database (GENI), and allocated to an EPA coordinator.

Step 2: Audit sites

If the site is under audit, any relating site contamination reports submitted to the EPA will be reviewed as required or if necessary. This is due to the fact that any information prepared for a site under audit will be reviewed by the site contamination auditor.

As previously noted, the EPA may review reports received relating to a site subject to an audit:

• to maintain an understanding of the nature and extent of site contamination

• to understand the progression of the assessment and remediation program

• to ensure the clauses of a voluntary proposal or conditions of an order are being adhered to

• if the report contains any information that is not subject to the scope of the audit.

Step 3: Certified practitioner

The EPA will publish separately its expectation in relation to certified practitioners and the schemes that it will recognise.

Step 4: Review of reports

When the EPA reviews a report, it will initially undertake a limited review using the standard report review template. The limited review of site contamination reports is conducted with reference to two broad criteria, relating to whether the report:

• has been prepared in accordance with relevant EPA approved guidance

• meets the EPA expectations of the defined goals of the assessment and/or remediation undertaken (as defined in Section 3).

15


The first criterion allows the EPA to determine whether the conclusions and/or findings of the report have been derived based on sound scientific evidence. The second criterion allows the EPA to determine any further assessment and/or remediation required.

Once a report has been reviewed, recommendations for further assessment or remediation will be made with reference to the EPA defined goals for addressing site contamination (Section 3).

If it is determined that a report has significant flaws in addressing the defined goals, the EPA will undertake a detailed review. The Principal Adviser or Manager Site Contamination must provide approval prior to a detailed review being undertaken.

Step 5: Site classification

Subsequent to the review of a site contamination report, a site will be classified using the processes described in Part 2 of this framework.

Step 6: Selection of regulatory action

The appropriate and proportionate regulatory action will be determined and implemented as described in Parts 3 and 4 of this framework.

Step 7: Regulatory decision notice

A regulatory decision notice (RDN) will be prepared using the RDN template, as detailed in Section 3, and the site status maintained on the EPA internal database (GENI).

The site will then be regulated according to the provisions of the regulatory action taken.

Regulatory decision notices are described in Section 4.

2.5 Site contamination audit reports

The EPA has a procedure in place for the review of site contamination audit reports. This procedure is outlined in the Guidelines for the site contamination audit system (2015).

2.6 Reporting timeframes

The time it takes to complete works and subsequently deliver reports is dependent on a number of factors. The reporting timeframes, based on the EPA regulatory priority levels, are detailed in Table 1. The EPA regulatory priority levels are determined using the process described in Section 7. These timeframes will be used as the EPA’s preferred reporting timeframes. However, alternative timeframes can be negotiated by the liable persons directly with the EPA.

Table 1 Reporting timeframes

Regulatory priority Reporting timeframes for assessment Reporting timeframes for remediation

Level 1 6 months or less* 8 months or less*

Level 2 Up to 9 months Up to 12 months

Level 3 Up to 12 months Up to 16 months

* The timeframe will ultimately be determined by site-specific circumstances. In certain instances, it may be necessary for work at a Level 1 regulatory priority site to be completed in less than six months.

16

3 Regulatory and orphan site management framework

EPA assessment and remediation goals The EPA has defined broad assessment and remediation goals in accordance with:

• the EP Act

• the ASC NEPM

• the GAR.

The EPA will review reports with respect to these goals and provide justification as to why a goal has or has not been successfully achieved.

Failure to meet a goal may be due to one or more of the following:

• insufficient data or information

• insufficient works (in the case of remediation)

• inadequate work undertaken by a non-certified person

• assessment or remediation not being conducted in accordance with relevant guidance.

In some instances, goals may take multiple stages of assessment to be successfully completed (for example, the determination of the nature and extent of site contamination). It is also possible for multiple goals to be addressed within the same assessment program.

When the EPA makes recommendations for further assessment or remedial works, reference to these goals will be made. The goals are detailed in the subsequent sections.

3.1 EPA assessment goals

The three EPA assessment goals (Figure 4) have been defined to reflect the key stages of the characterisation of site contamination. The assessment goals consider the fundamentals of site characterisation in accordance with the tiered assessment approach and inherent reporting requirements as defined in the ASC NEPM.

Figure 4 EPA assessment goals

17


3.2 EPA remediation goals

The EPA has defined three remediation goals which are consistent with the EP Act. These goals are summarised in Figure 518 .

Figure 5 EPA remediation goals

18 Remediation option assessment (ROA); site remediation plan (SRP); validation plan (VP); remediation validation report (RVR); site management plan (SMP)

18


Regulatory decision notices The EPA considers regulatory decision notices (RDN) as an effective tool to:

• summarise the site contamination at a point in time

• clearly and transparently detail the regulatory actions made by the EPA

• detail the works that are being undertaken by a liable person to assess and/or remediate site contamination.

The use of an RDN is consistent with objective (1)(b)(ix)(B) in section 10 of the EP Act, which states:

(1) The objects of this Act are—

(b) to ensure that all reasonable and practicable measures are taken to protect, restore and enhance the quality of the environment having regard to the principles of ecologically sustainable development,

and—

(ix) to promote—

(B) disclosure of, and public access to, information about significant environment incidents and hazards.

The site contamination RDN template is provided in Appendix 2.

19


Part 2

Regulatory prioritisation process

20


Overview The EPA regulatory decision-making process relies on the determined site classification. This part of the framework details the process that the EPA uses to classify and prioritise sites, and inherently determine the appropriate and proportionate regulatory approach.

The site classification process has been developed to be as objective as possible. It is intended that site contamination (known or suspected), based on a prescribed activity, is classified and subsequently regulated consistently by the EPA. It is also intended that the classification of a site is reviewed as new information becomes available.

The EPA site classification process is detailed in Figure 6. Each step is described in detail in the subsequent sections.

Figure 6 Site classification process

21


Determination of person(s) liable for site contamination The first stage of the EPA site classification process is to determine whether liable persons exist for the purpose of assessing and/or remediating site contamination. Liable persons for site contamination is defined in Section 1.11.

It is necessary to determine whether liable persons exist to ascertain if site contamination can be regulated using the processes described in ‘Part 3 – Non-statutory approaches’, ‘Part 4 – Statutory approaches’ or whether the site falls under ‘Part 7 – EPA management of orphan sites’ of this framework.

The EPA will follow its standard procedure for determining liability.

22


Regulatory priority 7.1 Overview

The EPA is committed to risk-based regulation which allows it to ensure that appropriate and proportionate regulatory attention is given to a site so that risk is addressed in a timely and effective manner. The EPA uses a matrix of the potentially contaminating activity (PCA) and potential exposure pathways to determine the appropriate regulatory priority that should be assigned to a site.

The matrix allows the EPA to contemplate the key drivers of risk at a site, including, but not limited to, the:

• chemical substance

• likely, or nature and extent of, contamination

• potential exposure pathways that may exist.

The determined regulatory priority for a site enables the EPA to consistently select the appropriate and proportionate regulatory approach to address site contamination.

The regulatory priority at a site is deemed to be Levels 1, 2 or 3.

The EPA defines each regulatory priority as:

• Level 1: The potential or identified site contamination is of a high regulatory priority to the EPA.

• Level 2: The potential or identified site contamination is of a medium regulatory priority to the EPA.

• Level 3: The potential or identified site contamination is of a low regulatory priority to the EPA.

These regulatory priorities are intended solely for regulatory purposes and should not be referenced or used outside this context.

The regulatory priorities have been developed based on the EPA’s experience in the regulation of site contamination. Given the complexities of site contamination, there will be times when the assigned regulatory priority level does not adequately reflect the potential risk at a site. As such, the EPA may escalate or de-escalate the regulatory priority to address the potential risks.

The process for determining the regulatory priority at a site is provided in Figure 7 and is described in detail in the subsequent sections.

Figure 7 Regulatory priority process

7.2 Potentially contaminating activity ranking

Regulation 50 of the Environment Protection Regulations 2009 prescribes potentially contaminating activities (PCAs). The EPA has assigned risk rankings to each of these activities based on its experience and knowledge of the behaviour of site contamination associated with the PCA.

The PCA risk rankings have been separated into three categories: high, medium and low. The PCA ranking is provided in appendix 3.

23


In the instance that multiple PCAs have been undertaken at a site, the PCA associated with the highest risk ranking will be selected. If there is an insufficient record of the activities undertaken at a site, a conservative judgement will be made based on the chemical substances identified at the site.

7.3 Determination of exposure pathways

The potential impacts associated with site contamination have been separated to account for both human health, and water and the environment.

The exposure pathway is used in conjunction with the PCA to determine the appropriate regulatory priority in Section 7.6.

7.4 Potential exposure pathways − human health

The EPA will consider both potential sources and receptors to determine the following potential exposure pathways:

• No realistic exposure pathway (NEP) − There are no realistic exposure pathways present that would pose a potential risk to human health.

• Soil (S) − There is a potential risk to human health through direct contact with, or incidental ingestion or inhalation (dust) of, contaminated soils.

• Groundwater (GW) − There is a potential risk to human health through direct contact with, or ingestion of, contaminated groundwater or other water19.

• Vapour (V): There is a potential risk to human health through the inhalation of contaminated vapour.

• Groundwater and Vapour (GW&V) − There is a potential risk to human health through the inhalation of contaminated vapour and through direct contact with, or incidental ingestion of, contaminated groundwater.

When assessing whether a potential exposure pathway is present the EPA considers that:

• evidence must exist to suggest that a potential exposure pathway is present

• uncertainties or data gaps do not necessarily equate to the existence of a potential exposure pathway, however further investigation into a potential exposure pathways existence may be warranted based on uncertainty

• safe or regular occupational exposure may result in the existence of a potential exposure pathway associated with site contamination to be redundant for the purposes of regulatory prioritisation.

7.5 Potential exposure pathways − water and environment

The EPA will consider both potential sources and receptors to determine the following potential exposure pathways20:

• Soil (SE) − Actual or potential environmental harm that is not trivial exists, taking into account current or proposed land uses

• Groundwater (GWE) − Actual or potential harm to groundwater that is not trivial exists

• Water (WE) − Actual or potential harm to surface water and marine waters that is not trivial exists.

7.6 Determination of regulatory priority

The EPA will determine the appropriate regulatory priority using the two calibrated matrices presented in Table 2 and 3. The general process for the determination of the regulatory priority is detailed in Figure 8.

19 Refer to water under Section 3 of the EP Act 20 Refer to Section 5B of the EP Act

24


Figure 8 Determination of regulatory priority

The regulatory priority may be dictated by the environmental harm at a site. However, the EPA expects that any potential risk to human health will always be addressed in the first instance.

Table 2 details the appropriate priority level associated with potential risk to human health, while Table 3 contemplates environmental harm.

Table 2 Regulatory priority matrix relating to human health

PCA ranking Regulatory priority level (human health)

High N/A L2 L1 L1 L1

Medium N/A L3 L2 L2 L1

Low N/A L3 L3 L2 L2

(NEP) (S) (GW) (V) (GW&V)

Table 3 Regulatory priority matrix relating to environmental harm

PCA Ranking Regulatory priority level (environmental harm)

High L2 L1 L1

Medium L3 L2 L1

Low L3 L3 L2

(SE) (GWE) (WE)

In instances where a liable party has responsibility for multiple sites the EPA will give consideration to the prioritisation of those sites, including any specific risks identified by that process. The EPA may seek a voluntary proposal or an alternative approach may be utilised to ensure the progression of the assessment and remediation of the site.

25


Response to regulatory priority determination Following the determination of priority, the EPA will generally regulate site contamination using the approaches and timing described in Table 4. The approaches and timings described in Table 4 are intended to be used as a guide only. There are many factors that will influence the regulatory approach taken.

Table 4 Response to regulatory priority determination

Regulatory priority Regulatory approach Assessment timeframe Remediation timeframe

Level 1 Voluntary proposal 6 months or less 8 months or less

Level 2 Non-statutory agreement Up to 9 months Up to 12 months

Level 3 Non-statutory agreement Up to 12 months Up to 16 months

These approaches will be implemented in accordance with Parts 3 and 4 of this framework.

26


Triggers for a site contamination audit The triggers for a site contamination audit are described in the Guidelines for the site contamination audit system21.

The audit triggers provide a consistent approach to managing sites (and surrounding sites).

The decision to require a site contamination audit will be approved by the Principal Adviser Site Contamination or the Manager Site Contamination following the review of an RDN.

21 Published December 2015

27


Part 3

Non-statutory approaches

28


10 Non-statutory agreements 10.1 Overview

The EPA may use non-statutory tools (Part 3) or statutory agreements (Part 4) to regulate site contamination.

A non-statutory agreement is between the EPA and a person, which has not been formalised under the EP Act. The agreement is a declaration by a person that they will undertake assessment and/or remediation within a set timeframe as recommended by or agreed with the EPA. A finalised non-statutory agreement is a signed letter of agreement, issued by the EPA to the person specifying the agreed works and timeframes.

Non-statutory agreements are an effective regulatory tool for sites of low to medium risk as:

• the process for engaging in a non-statutory agreement requires less regulatory burden than that of a statutory tool

• it is envisaged that the same assessment and remediation outcomes will be achieved as if a statutory tool was used.

Finalised non-statutory agreements will be retained within the site file.

10.2 Engaging in non-statutory agreements

Non-statutory agreements will be used when the need for a voluntary proposal has not been triggered, according to voluntary proposal triggers defined in Section 11.2.

Figure 9 shows the process the EPA will use to engage in non-statutory agreements. Each of these steps are presented in more detail as follows:

Figure 9 Process for engaging in non-statutory agreements

Step 1a: Proposal provided to the EPA for review

When the EPA receives a work proposal from a liable person, it will be reviewed with respect to:

• the regulatory priority and classification of the site

• the EPA’s understanding of the identified potential risks posed by the site contamination

• whether the specified works and timeframes are suitable to address the identified potential risks.

If the work proposal is deemed to be satisfactory, the EPA will notify the liable person of its acceptance of the proposal and progress directly to Step 4.

29


If deemed to be unsatisfactory, the EPA will progress to Step 1.

Step 1: EPA letter of recommendation

When the EPA has determined that a non-statutory agreement is unsatisfactory, then a recommendation letter will be issued to the liable person. This letter will detail:

• the purpose of the letter and the information that formed the EPA’s recommendations

• the EPA-determined risk ranking of the site, including the rationale for the ranking

• a list of recommendations for further works with relevance to the EPA-defined assessment and remediation goals

• reporting timeframes within which the EPA expects reports to be delivered (as detailed in Section 2.6)

• the requirement for the liable person to provide a written response to the EPA within four weeks of the date of the letter.

The recommended works and timeframes included in this letter form the provisions of the EPA’s expectations of a non-statutory agreement.

Step 2: Review by liable person

The liable person will then be required to contact the EPA in writing within four weeks of the date of the letter to either:

• agree to the recommended works and timeframes of the letter, or

• enter into negotiations regarding the recommended works and/or timeframes specified in the letter from the EPA.

In the first instance when a liable person agrees to the non-statutory agreement, the EPA will progress to Step 4.

If a liable person wishes to negotiate recommended works or timeframes, the EPA will progress to Step 3.

If the EPA is not contacted within the timeframe outlined in the letter, the liable person may be deemed to be noncomplying, under Section 13.2.

Step 3: Negotiation of terms of non-statutory agreement

The EPA is willing to negotiate the recommended works and timeframes that form the provisions of a non-statutory agreement via email, meeting in person or letter.

It is expected that a liable person’s proposed variations to the recommended works or timeframes are submitted in writing to the EPA within two weeks of negotiations commencing.

The EPA will progress to Step 4 if it deems the varied works and timeframes submitted to the EPA by a liable person to be both:

• reasonably justified

• satisfactory to address the identified potential risks at the site.

Further negotiation will be required If the EPA deems the varied works and timeframes submitted by a liable person to be either:

• unjustified, or

• unsatisfactory to address the identified potential risks at the site.

The person is deemed non-complying when three variations have been submitted and failed to meet the minimum requirements of the EPA.

30


Step 4: Regulate and follow up accordingly

When an agreement has been reached, the EPA will send a letter detailing the agreed works and delivery timeframes to the liable person.

This letter forms the non-statutory agreement with the EPA and the liable person.

The site will then be regulated in accordance with the requirements of the non-statutory agreement.

31


Part 4

Statutory approaches

32


11 Voluntary proposals 11.1 Overview

Voluntary site contamination assessment proposals (VSCAP) and voluntary site remediation proposals (VSRO) are established under sections 103I and 103K of the EP Act. Collectively, the framework refers to both statutory tools as ‘voluntary proposals’.

The EPA has minimum provisions that must be addressed by a person for a voluntary proposal to be accepted. These provisions are significantly more detailed than the provisions of non-statutory agreements.

Voluntary proposals:

• provide persons with regulatory certainty

• provide the EPA with certainty when managing priority sites

• provide the community with an increased level of publicly available information

• are an effective way to ensure that persons understand their obligations and requirements under the EP Act

• can be an effective way to bring non-complying persons into compliance without the need to issue a SCAO or SRO.

A finalised voluntary proposal will be served to the person forming the agreement with the EPA, and will be placed in the EPA Public Register.

11.2 Triggers for voluntary proposals

The general process used for determining whether a statutory agreement is appropriate is detailed in Figure 10.

Figure 10 Determination of when the EPA will use a statutory or non-statutory agreement

The triggers for when the EPA will, or may, require a voluntary proposal for managing risk are detailed as follows. A person may also request to enter into a voluntary proposal at any time, unless an order is in effect.

The EPA will request a voluntary proposal be entered into when both of the following occur:

• the EPA holds, as a minimum, a Tier 1 investigation report that includes intrusive investigation (or an equivalent report) for the site

• the site has been ranked as a Level 1 regulatory priority.

The EPA, at its discretion, may also request a voluntary proposal in the following circumstances:

• a site has been deemed to be of community significance

• an ‘orphan site’ (refer to Part 7) managed by the EPA and a person has been subsequently identified to be liable for the site contamination

33


• a site at which the site contamination extends over a large area or is expected to require extensive and/or complex assessment and/or remediation

• a site that has been identified in an area in which there are a number of other complex contamination issues with more than one liable person.

• to ensure that conditions of an audit are adhered to or addressed into the future.

• to ensure that ongoing monitoring or management of a site is administered.

11.3 Engaging in and varying voluntary proposals

Figure 11 details the general process the EPA will generally follow when engaging in or varying voluntary proposals. Each of these steps are discussed in the following:

Figure 11 Process for engaging in statutory agreements

Step 1a: Does a voluntary proposal exist for the site?

The EPA will initially confirm if a site either:

• is currently regulated under a pre-existing voluntary proposal; or

• can be added to a pre-existing voluntary proposal.

If it is deemed that a site is, or can potentially be, added to a pre-existing voluntary proposal, the EPA will refer to Section 11.4.

If no relevant voluntary proposal exists, the EPA will progress to Step 1.

Step 1: Letter sent to liable person

A letter will be issued to the liable person stating that the EPA requests a voluntary proposal.

The letter will include details relating to:

• the site’s classification

34


• why the EPA requests a voluntary proposal

• the EPA’s interest in meeting with the liable person, their consultant and auditor (if applicable) to discuss the provisions of the proposal

• the EPA’s expectation that this meeting will take place within four weeks of the date of the letter.

The EPA letter may also request that the liable person, their consultant and auditor (if applicable) prepare and submit a draft voluntary proposal prior to meeting with the EPA. The purpose of this is to allow informed discussion to occur at the scheduled meeting. A preferred voluntary proposal template is included in Appendix 1. It is expected that the liable person will contact the EPA and schedule a meeting within one month of the date of the letter. If this does not occur, it is likely that further regulatory action will ensue.

Step 2: Discussion period and iterations of voluntary proposal

The general iterative process used in the preparation of a voluntary proposal is detailed in Figure 12.

Figure 12 Iterative development of a voluntary proposal

Upon receipt of a draft voluntary proposal, the proposal will be reviewed by the EPA with regard to:

• the EPA recommended provisions of voluntary proposals as specified in the voluntary proposal template available in Appendix 1.

• whether the specified provisions are adequate to address the potential risks to human health or the environment (ie addressing the assessment or remediation goals).

If the EPA deems a voluntary proposal to be satisfactory, then it will proceed to Step 3. If the EPA deems a voluntary proposal to be unsatisfactory, the provisions of the proposal will be discussed at the scheduled meeting. It is intended that, by the conclusion of the meeting, the EPA and liable person will be in general agreement regarding the provisions of the voluntary proposal. Liable persons will then be requested to submit a secondary draft voluntary proposal within four weeks from the date of the meeting.

Upon receipt of a secondary draft voluntary proposal, that proposal will be reviewed by the EPA. If the secondary voluntary proposal is deemed to be satisfactory, the EPA will then proceed to Step 3.

35


If the secondary voluntary proposal is deemed unsatisfactory, a letter will be issued to the liable person detailing the EPA’s concerns and suggested changes. Liable persons will then have four weeks from the date of this letter to submit a third draft voluntary proposal.

Upon receipt of the third draft voluntary proposal, that proposal will be reviewed by the EPA. If the third voluntary proposal is deemed to be satisfactory, the EPA will then proceed to Step 3.

If the third iteration of a voluntary proposal is found to be unsatisfactory, the EPA may make a determination as to whether a person is likely to meet the minimum acceptable requirements of a voluntary proposal. If a proposal is found to be unsatisfactory at this point (and the EPA believes that the person is unlikely to meet the minimum acceptable requirements of a voluntary proposal):

• the person will be deemed non-complying and appropriate regulatory action will be taken as per Section 13

• the EPA will send a letter detailing its concerns, suggested changes and the requirement for a subsequent draft to be submitted within four weeks.

Step 3: Acceptance letter and statutory agreement coming into effect

When the EPA deems a voluntary proposal to be satisfactory, an acceptance letter will be issued to the liable person.

The finalised voluntary proposal will then be served to the liable person and the time when the voluntary proposal is served is deemed the point in time when the agreement with the EPA comes into effect.

The EPA delegation instrument restricts who can approve a voluntary proposal. The approval of a voluntary proposal can only be signed by the Manager Site Contamination or other listed delegates.

Step 4: Regulate accordingly

The EPA will then regulate the site in accordance with the provisions of the voluntary proposal.

11.4 Variation of an agreed voluntary proposal

All voluntary proposals should include provisions regarding how and in what circumstances a voluntary proposal can be altered. If it is agreed that a voluntary proposal needs to be varied, it will be amended in accordance with the provisions of the voluntary proposal. The EPA delegation instrument restricts who can approve a variation to a voluntary proposal. The variation of a voluntary proposal can only be signed by the Manager Site Contamination or other listed delegates.

11.5 Delay events

If the deliverables of a voluntary proposal are to be delayed, the EPA expects to be notified within two weeks of the agreed deliverable date. If the delay event will result in a delay greater than 30 days a formal delay event must be submitted and agreed to by the EPA.

All formal delay events are considered to be variations of a voluntary proposal and will require approval by the Manager Site Contamination.

11.6 Completion of an agreed voluntary proposal

When satisfied that the assessment or remediation has been carried out and completed in accordance with the approved voluntary proposal, the EPA will notify the person in writing that it is satisfied the provisions of the proposal have been met and are subsequently no longer in effect. The delegation instrument restricts who can approve the completion of a voluntary proposal. The notification of completion of a voluntary proposal can only be signed by the Manager Site Contamination or other listed delegates.

36


11.7 Failure to meet the objectives of a voluntary proposal

The EPA understands that unavoidable delay events can occur. This is discussed in section 11.5. The EPA can agree to not issue an order to a person if the person undertakes to carry out the agreed work in accordance with an approved voluntary proposal.

However if a person fails to carry out any of the agreed work in accordance with the proposal and/or fails to meet the agreed timeframes (without an agreed delay event), the EPA is likely to commence regulatory action (including the issuing of orders) to gain regulatory certainty. The regulatory action is likely to require the person undertake the work described in voluntary proposal within timeframes set by the EPA.

37


12 Orders 12.1 Site contamination assessment and site remediation orders

Site contamination assessment orders and site remediation orders are established under Sections 103H and 103J of the EP Act, respectively.

Orders are issued to an appropriate person by the EPA and require a person (or persons) to undertake and complete EPA-specified assessment or remediation within a set timeframe. If a person does not comply with the conditions of an order, they are committing a criminal offence and prosecution may result.

Orders are an effective tool for regulating persons who have been deemed to be non-complying.

12.2 Issuing orders

If it is determined that an order is necessary, the draft order must be reviewed by the Crown Solicitors Office.

The delegations instrument22 restricts who can sign orders. As such, site contamination assessment orders and site remediation orders can only be signed by the Manager Site Contamination or other listed delegates.

The conditions of an order are at the discretion of the EPA. However, it is likely that any timeframes will reflect those detailed in Section 2.6.

In accordance with section 115 of the EP Act

38

22


Part 5

Regulation of non-compliance

39


13 Non-compliance 13.1 Overview

This section details the instances in which the EPA deems a person to be non-complying and how an appropriate and proportionate regulatory tool is selected to manage the non-compliance.

13.2 Persons considered to be non-complying

A person may be deemed to be non-complying by the EPA, in relation to the assessment and remediation of site contamination, when that person:

• fails to submit a report, or any other requested information, to the EPA within a set or agreed timeframe

• will not willingly engage or meet the minimum EPA conditions for entering into a non-statutory agreement or voluntary proposal

• fails to meet a clause of a voluntary proposal

• fails to comply with one or multiple conditions of an order

• is not meeting, or not likely to meet, their obligations under the EP Act.

In the first instance, when a person has failed to submit a report, or any other requested information, within a set or agreed timeframe, the EPA will contact the person in writing. The letter or email will request that the person submits the overdue information within two weeks or deemed to be non-complying.

For the remaining instances, it will be at the discretion of the EPA to determine the point at which a person becomes noncomplying.

There are several offence provisions established within Part 10A of the EP Act. The EPA’s Compliance and enforcement regulatory options and tools23 (2009) document provides relevant detail about the regulation of these contraventions and, as such, have not been included in this framework.

13.3 Managing non-compliance for assessment and remediation

Figure 13 demonstrates the process the EPA will follow when determining the appropriate regulatory tool to manage a person deemed to be non-complying.

23 www.epa.sa.gov.au/files/4771765_cem.pdf

40

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/files/4771765_cem.pdf


Figure 13 Determination of regulatory action for non-complying persons

13.4 Show cause letters

The purpose of show cause letters is to inform a person that:

• there is evidence to suggest that the person is non-complying or unwilling to undertake the work requested by the EPA

• a site contamination assessment order (SCAO) or site remediation order (SRO) will be issued unless the person can show reasonable cause

• alternative regulatory action may occur if reasonable cause is shown for the suspected non-compliance.

When a person has been deemed non-complying, the EPA may issue a show cause letter signed by the Manager Site Contamination.

Liable persons will be given four weeks from the date of the show cause letter to respond to the EPA, unless there is a risk to human health and/or the environment that would constitute a hazardous circumstance24, in which case, more immediate action may be taken (for example, an emergency SRO). If reasonable cause is not shown for suspected noncompliance, the EPA is likely to proceed with further regulatory action.

24 Significantly hazardous circumstances are defined in the GAR

41


The determination as to whether a reasonable response to the show cause letter has been provided will be made by the Manager Site Contamination.

13.5 Warning letters

A warning provides a person with clear notice a breach of the EP Act has been deemed to have occurred. The warning also informs that person that if any future non-compliance occurs, then further regulatory action is likely to be taken.

Regulation 16(1)(h) requires the EPA to place in the Public Register copies of each written warning issued in relation to an alleged contravention of the EP Act.

Warning letters will be signed by the Manager Site Contamination.

13.6 Civil penalties and prosecution

In the instance that a negotiated civil penalty or prosecution is considered appropriate, then such matters will be investigated. Enforcement options will be determined by the EPA Compliance Enforcement Strategy Committee.

Civil penalties and prosecutions are detailed in the Compliance and enforcement regulatory options and tools handbook25.

25 www.epa.sa.gov.au/files/4771765_cem.pdf

42

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/files/4771765_cem.pdf


Part 6

Reduction of regulatory involvement

43


14 Site management plans and cessation of regulatory involvement

For site contamination to be regulated effectively, the EPA has defined two scenarios in which the level of regulatory involvement will be reduced or ceased. These include when:

• a site management plan (SMP) has been prepared outlining the requirement for any ongoing management

• a regulatory endpoint has been reached.

The subsequent sections describe when the EPA is willing to agree to an SMP or accept that a site poses no risk to human health or the environment, and a suitable endpoint has been reached.

44


15 Site management plans If the EPA has recommended the preparation of an SMP, the assessment and remediation work at the site has reached a point where the nature and extent of the site contamination is well characterised. It is also expected that any immediate or likely risk to human health or the environment have been addressed or are being managed appropriately. As such, frequent and intensive regulation would offer little benefit for progressing the site towards a point in which site regulation can cease in its entirety.

By using SMPs, the EPA can ensure that sites (typical of the example described in the previous paragraph) are being monitored and managed appropriately without the need for intensive and frequent regulatory action. This, in turn, allows regulatory resources to be allocated to other priority sites.

The development of an SMP for a site is likely to include management requirements for the remediation or post-remediation phases of work. An SMP may also be required as part of the audit process or as a condition of an audit report.

If an SMP is appropriate and has been prepared in accordance with relevant guidance, the EPA would only regulate a site under one of the following circumstances:

• on a predetermined basis to ensure that the provisions of the SMP are being adhered to

• when a reporting trigger has resulted in new information being submitted to the EPA for review

• if information comes to the attention of the EPA that the site contamination potentially poses a risk to human health and/or the environment that has not been previously addressed (eg as a result of a proposed change in land use).

A reduction in regulation due to an SMP being in place does not necessarily translate to a reduction in the level of work or assessment required by a liable person.

45


16 Cessation of regulatory involvement 16.1 Overview

With respect to site contamination, the EPA is of the opinion that a regulatory endpoint has been reached when:

Assessment, remediation and/or validation works have demonstrated that the contamination at the site does not pose a current risk to human health or the environment. As such, no further works or assessment are required at the site. However, the EPA reserves the right to request further work or assessment if new information is

received that suggests site contamination at the site poses a risk to human health and/or the environment.

The EPA considers a regulatory endpoint can be reached in two ways through:

• the audit process

• the standard assessment and remediation process (non-sensitive land use sites only).

16.2 Regulatory endpoint through the site contamination audit process

If the EPA receives a complying site contamination audit report, which states that a site is suitable for its intended use without condition, the EPA will no longer actively regulate the site. However, if off-site contamination is identified at an audit site that requires further assessment and/or remediation, the EPA will continue to regulate the site.

16.3 General regulatory endpoint

The EPA will consider a number of factors when determining whether to cease regulatory involvement at a site, including but not limited to:

• the site has progressed through the standard assessment and remediation process, and remediation practicability has been achieved

• there is documentation indicating that the primary sources of contamination have been identified and remediated at the site (including the submission of an RTEN opinion from an historic audit report)

• it has been demonstrated that groundwater and vapour contamination (as applicable) is not expanding, migrating or increasing in concentration and that there are no primary sources of contamination

• off-site contamination has been assessed and found not to exist, or an adequate risk assessment has been undertaken demonstrating that off-site contamination does not pose a risk to off-site receptors.

46


Part 7

EPA management of orphan sites

47


17 Orphan site contamination 17.1 Introduction

Site contamination is a complex social, economic and environmental issue both nationally and internationally that, if not adequately addressed, can pose a significant public health risk.

As described in Part 2, the EP Act provides statutory tools for the EPA to regulate site contamination where there is a person with liability for site contamination.

In some circumstances, there may be no person liable for site contamination. This can occur when the person cannot be reasonably identified or when a person cannot practicably undertake the assessment or remediation that is required by the EPA. In such circumstances, the EPA classifies these sites as ‘orphan sites’.

The term ‘orphan site’ is used internationally. It is intended to describe the circumstance where there is a site in which the person liable for site contamination cannot be reasonably identified or when a liable person is identifiable but is deemed in law not to have the capacity to carry out or meet the costs of assessment, remediation of mitigation required.

There may also be a need to act promptly when a site is contaminated to the extent it presents a significant public health risk while work is undertaken to identify if there is a liable party. To date, there has been a small number of orphan sites identified in South Australia that also present a significant unmanaged public health risk. The actual number of cases remaining of this kind is unknown.

The EPA procures site contamination consultants to undertake government funded assessment work of orphan sites.

Part 7 of the framework outlines the EPA’s approach to the management of orphan sites in South Australia, including engagement with SA Health on public health risk matters, the prioritisation of orphan sites, and engagement with the affected community and key stakeholders.

17.2 Orphan site identification

In most instances, the EPA considers that a potential risk to public health may exist when both of the following apply:

• site contamination extends beyond a source site or is known to be widespread (in some cases defined site boundaries do not exist)

• the site contamination is likely to impact on sensitive land uses26.

In most circumstances, the EPA will become aware of orphan sites via information received through the standard regulatory processes as outlined in Parts 1 and 2 of this document.

The EPA may also become aware of the contamination through:

• the review of historic files

• referrals from other government departments

• community notifications or complaints

• evidence from adjoining properties

• assessment programs.

The EPA has established a process for declaring an orphan site. While not prescribed, the process is consistent with the legislative requirements of the EP Act. This process is outlined in Section 18.

26 Sensitive land use is defined by the EP Act to be residential, childcare, preschool or primary school

48


In the event that the EPA identifies an orphan site, the site will be prioritised via a desktop risk assessment. The process for prioritising orphan sites is detailed in Section 19.

Site contamination associated with an orphan site is often scientifically complex. It can take significant time and resources to assess the potential public health risks and determine appropriate management. These complexities often relate to:

• multiple contaminating activities having taken place over time (historic in nature) contributing to the contamination, ie multiple PCAs contributing to single or disconnected contamination plumes

• the location of the activity that caused site contamination is not known, ambiguous or unidentifiable

• the site contamination may be widespread as a result of the natural migration of the chemical substances in the environment.

17.3 Exceptional circumstances policy The Government of South Australia has endorsed the ‘Exceptional Circumstances Policy for Management of Orphan Site

that also present an unmanaged public health risk, June 2016’ (the policy). The policy was developed to provide

guidance on when and how ex gratia assistance from the State will be provided to owners of private properties affected

by site contamination where there is no appropriate person as defined in the EP Act to issue a site contamination

assessment order or site remediation order for assessment and remediation, including mitigation respectively. The policy

contains guidelines and criteria to enable the State, through the Orphan Sites Committee, to determine cases in a fair

and consistent manner.

The policy applies to private properties, both residential and commercial:

• that are affected by site contamination that was unknown at the time the properties were acquired, and,

• that have no appropriate person27 as defined in the EP Act to assign legal liability to for assessment, remediation or

mitigation, or the person responsible lacks capacity to meet the costs of assessment, remediation or mitigation; and,

• that are contaminated to an extent that presents a significant28 health risk; and

• where active mitigation is required.

This policy should be read in conjunction with this framework and in particular Section 17, Section 18 and Section 19.

27 An appropriate person will not exist if the person has died, ceased to exist (body corporate), cannot be identified or located, or will be unable to carry out or meet the costs of the assessment or remediation required.

28 As informed by the risk profile of the substance involved and consistent with international public health practice eg the action response framework for TCE (SA Health 2014).

49


18 Decision framework and governance 18.1 Overview

Following the regulatory process outlined in Section 2, if a liable person cannot be determined, the site will be declared to be orphan.

In accordance with S103C of the EP Act, a liable person will not exist if the person:

• has died or, in the case of a body corporate, ceased to exist

• after reasonable inquiry, cannot be identified or located

• if, in the opinion of the EPA, for any reason, a person will be unable to carry out, or meet the costs and expenses of, the assessment or remediation required or authorised under an order.

It may also be the case that the EPA is unable to determine a liable person due to a lack of information relating to the location of the source site. In this instance the EPA, as part of assessment to determine if a potential public health risk exists, will actively seek to identify the location of source sites with the intention of determining liable persons.

As per the policy (Section 17.3) assessment of site contamination on orphan sites will be managed by the EPA. The subsequent section detail the specific roles and responsibilities of both the Committee and relevant government agencies.

18.2 Stage 1: Initial risk assessment and prioritisation

When becoming aware of actual or potential site contamination and concluding that an orphan site exists, the EPA will undertake an initial desktop assessment to prioritise the site based on the potential public health risk as determined in consultation with SA Health. The assessment will be informed by the likelihood of inhalation of soil vapour, or ingestion, dermal contact or irrigation with contaminated soil or groundwater. The priority will be determined by the risk of adverse health effects for those exposed to contaminated vapour, soil or groundwater. Based upon the risk, the orphaned site will be prioritised into one of four levels:

• Level 1: High priority assessment

• Level 2: Medium-priority assessment

• Level 3: Low priority assessment

• Level 4: No assessment required

The EPA will communicate the results of the assessment as soon as reasonably possible to affected residents and owners and consult with the Committee before proceeding with detailed technical assessment for high and medium priority sites based on relative priority.

18.3 Stage 2: Detailed assessment

Based on the initial assessment above, the EPA, in consultation with SA Health and Department of Treasury and Finance, will prepare an annual works program informed by public health risk prioritisation. It will undertake detailed assessments of priority sites, including through the use of site contamination consultants and auditors based on the EPA’s Guideline for the assessment and remediation of groundwater contamination (2009) and the ASC NEPM.

This may be subject to agreement with affected residents to temporarily vacate their dwellings at their own cost to allow controlled testing to be undertaken. Assistance may be offered to individuals who are unable to afford temporary relocation at the discretion of the Committee. The EPA will maintain an active community engagement program during this period. All works are voluntary and owners will at all times have the discretion to decline testing of their properties.

50


The results of the assessment will inform a final public health assessment to be undertaken by the EPA in consultation with SA Health. The assessment of the health risk and the determination of the appropriate response to it will be informed by the risk profile of the substance involved.

18.4 Stage 3: Mitigation

Where the assessment confirms a medium to high public health risk due to groundwater use, the EPA will consider ways to restrict or prohibit groundwater use. This will be done in consultation with SA Health and the EPA will actively engage with affected residents and owners.

Where the assessment confirms a medium to high public health risk due to vapour intrusion, the Committee on advice from the EPA and SA Health will on behalf of the State consider the mitigation options available and, through Renewal SA, make offers of assistance on a case-by-case basis to property owners to undertake mitigation at individual properties such as installation of equipment to remove the risk. The Committee may also consider other options to mitigate the risk including through remediation of the source, or acquisition, remediation and resale or development of affected properties.

Renewal SA will project manage the mitigation works subject to any regulatory standards set by the EPA and written agreement with individual owners to consent to the works, contribute to the cost and maintain installed equipment or other building improvements.

51


19 Prioritisation of an orphan site 19.1 Overview

When prioritising an orphan site, the EPA’s primary objective is protecting public health.

When the EPA prioritises orphan sites, each will be assessed with respect to the two key drivers of a potential public health risk:

• inhalation of soil vapour contamination

• ingestion, dermal contact and irrigation with contaminated groundwater.

The potential public health risks associated with exposure to contaminated groundwater and soil vapour will be determined to be one of the following: low, medium or high risk.

In the instance that a high risk is determined for both vapour and groundwater exposure pathways, the site will be considered to be of a very high potential risk and will be identified for high-priority action.

Furthermore, if the EPA receives a notification of a potential or actual hazardous circumstance29, it will, as soon as possible, engage with SA Health to determine any potential public health risks, in accordance with the Working Together Agreement.

The core principles of the orphan site prioritisation tool is to ensure that appropriate action is taken at orphan sites where a potential or actual public health risk exists, and to ensure that resources are allocated in an effective and sustainable manner.

Following prioritisation and where considered essential the EPA will assess and manage the risk to human health in close consultation with relevant community members and, as a secondary objective, undertake further work to attempt to identify a liable person or persons.

The potential public health risk determination based on groundwater and vapour intrusion exposure pathways is detailed in Sections 19.2 and 19.3, respectively.

19.2 Potential public health risk due to groundwater use

The potential public health risk related to the potential exposure to groundwater contamination is determined as a function of two factors:

• number of known or likely domestic groundwater users within 500 m of the site

• most sensitive identifiable groundwater use.

The EPA considers that the number of people using groundwater is a key factor when determining the need for priority action to be taken. This is based on the rationale that the EPA can advise persons not to use their groundwater in the following two situations:

• if a reasonably small number of groundwater users exist in an area

• the community is not dependent on groundwater as a resource.

This allows the EPA to delay the need for priority assessment in an area (provided a vapour risk does not exist). This process will be undertaken via an EPA community engagement program in accordance with the Site Contamination: Interim guideline for communication and engagement [2016]30. The EPA may use a legislative institutional control to formalise the restriction of the taking of groundwater, eliminating the exposure pathway.

29 Significantly hazardous circumstances are defined in the GAR 30 www.epa.sa.gov.au/files/12566_sc_community_engagement.pdf

52

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/files/12566_sc_community_engagement.pdf


Conversely, if a larger number of groundwater users exist and/or a community is dependent on groundwater as a primary water resource, the EPA will prioritise the site accordingly. Simultaneously, the EPA will consult with the community as soon as practicable and advise not to use groundwater in the interim period.

If it is unclear what the most sensitive groundwater use is in an area, then reference will be made to the groundwater quality. Based on available data, the EPA will determine whether the groundwater quality is suitable and potentially being used for potable purposes.

The potential public health risk associated with groundwater contamination is calculated by:

• determining the appropriate risk number for each of the three factors, as detailed in Table 5

• summing the risk number

• selecting the appropriate risk level, as detailed in Table 6 .

Table 5 Groundwater risk value determination

Risk number No risk 1 2 3

Number of groundwater users identified within 500 m of site

Nil <10 10<20 >20 or groundwater dependent community

Most sensitive groundwater use – industrial irrigation/recreational potable

Table 6 Risk level associated with sum of risk numbers for groundwater

Sum of risk numbers Resultant risk level

<3 Low

3 – 4 Medium

5 – 6 High

For example, a site would have a summed risk number of 5 (3 + 2) under the following circumstances:

• 60 groundwater users have been identified within 500 m

• groundwater is used for irrigation purposes.

As such, the site would be deemed to have a high risk level.

If the EPA holds information confirming there are no groundwater users identified within 500 m of a site, then it will apply a nil risk number against the number of groundwater users. This is likely to be confirmed via an EPA community engagement program.

19.3 Potential public health risk due to vapour intrusion

The potential public health risk caused by vapour intrusion is determined as a function of two factors:

• the most sensitive land use type within 500 m of the site

• the potential that vapour intrusion will occur.

Unlike groundwater contamination, the risk related to vapour cannot be scaled with regard to the number of people that it effects. This is based on the rationale that:

53


• the EPA cannot remove the potential vapour exposure pathway via building community awareness (nor can it use institutional or regulatory controls to reduce or mitigate exposure)

• if a potential risk exists to a single individual, then this is considered to be a potential public health risk.

The potential public health risk associated with vapour intrusion is calculated by:

• determining the appropriate risk number for each of the three factors, as detailed in Table 7

• summing the risk numbers electing the appropriate risk level as detailed in Table 8.

Table 7 Vapour risk value determination

Risk number No risk 1 2 3

Land use within 500 m of site Vacant NEPM D31 NEPM C32 NEPM A/B33

Likelihood of vapour intrusion None (non-volatile) Unlikely Potentially Likely

Table 8 Risk level associated with sum of risk numbers for vapour

Sum of risk numbers Resultant risk level

<3 Low

3–4 Medium

5–6 High

The likelihood of vapour intrusion occurring is dependent upon many factors, including, but not limited to:

• chemical properties

• depth to contamination source

• soil types (geology)

• weather conditions

• property construction type.

The determination of the likelihood of a vapour intrusion risk existing will be made by experienced EPA staff. Where a hazardous circumstance is reported to the EPA, it will engage with SA Health in accordance with the WTA. The EPA will always take a precautionary approach and never deem a vapour intrusion risk to be unlikely unless there are multiple lines of evidence to support the determination.

19.4 Determination of orphan site priority

The required course of action is based on the cumulative risk level of the potential public health risk from exposure to vapour and groundwater. This is presented in Table 9. The meaning of each priority level is described in the following detail.

31 NEPM D: Commercial/Industrial land use 32 NEPM C: Recreational land use 33 NEPM B/C: Residential, child care, pre-school, primary school and secondary school

54


Table 9 EPA action level based on the cumulative groundwater and vapour risk

Groundwater Risk level Low Medium High

High Orphan L1 Orphan L1 Orphan L1

Vapour risk Medium Orphan L3 Orphan L3 Orphan L2

Low Orphan L4 Orphan L3 Orphan L2

Level 1 priority (Orphan L1): Site contamination requires high-priority assessment.

Level 2 priority (Orphan L2): Site contamination requires medium-priority assessment.

Level 3 priority (Orphan L3): Site contamination requires low-priority assessment.

Level 4 priority (Orphan L4): Site contamination is unlikely to pose a potential public health and, as such, assessment is not required.

55


Part 8

Appendices

57


Appendix 1 Voluntary proposal template

<VSCAP/VSRP>

<Site Name>

PREPARED FOR: Environment Protection Authority South Australia (EPA)

COPY TO:

PREPARED BY:

DATE:

VARIATION NO:

1 Introduction

General information

<Include details clearly identifying who will be engaging in the voluntary proposal with the EPA>

Site identification

<Provide sufficient detail to identify the site(s) which fall under the provisions of the proposal. This should include site address(es) and certificate(s) of title. A map clearly identifying the site(s) should also be referenced and attached in the appendices>

Site contamination background

<Provide a brief description of the current understanding of contamination at the site(s) and key risk drivers, including potentially contaminating activities, whether site contamination is delineated, chemicals of concern, contaminated media and nearby sensitive receptors>

Site contamination professionals

<Provide details of the engaged certified site contamination practitioner and auditor (if applicable) who have been engaged to undertake works at the site>

2 Objectives of proposed assessment or remediation

<Provide details of the objectives of the proposal in this section. The EPA will provide guidance in what objectives should be included relating to an assessment and remediation proposal>

3 Scope of assessment or remediation work

<This section should describe a broad scope of the assessment and remediation that will be undertaken as a part of the voluntary proposal. A detailed schedule of works should also be included in the appendices>

59


4 Methodology and principles

<Provide detail of how assessment or remediation will be conducted as part of the proposal. This will include declarations to undertake assessment and remediation in respect to appropriate guidance. Key chemicals of interest can also be defined in this section. It may also be possible to preclude certain chemical substance from the assessment program as part of the proposal pending EPA approval>

5 Timeframes and milestones

<This section will include provisions for the timeframes for the completion of key milestones to be completed and deliverables of the scope of works. It is expected that provisions for delay events are included under this section, including the timeframe in which the EPA will be notified of a delay event>

6 Variation of proposal

<This section details the circumstances in which the EPA and liable persons will be able to vary the conditions or timeframes specified in the proposal. A register of proposal variations should be attached in the appendices>

7 Commencement and term of proposal

<This section should detail the circumstances and point in time in which the EPA will deem the provisions of the proposal are satisfied and notification stating as such delivered to the engaged person. It should be noted that the point in time in which the EPA serves the agreed VP on a person is the point in which the VP will commence>

8 EPA regulatory action

<The EPA may wish to define special instances in which it will deem a person to be non-complying with a proposal and hence issue a show cause and potentially subsequent Site Contamination Assessment Order or Site Remediation Order>

9 Notices

<This section details the nominated persons who will send receive correspondence in relation to the site. It should also include provisions regarding how and when correspondence should be received. The EPA will provide contact details for a senior staff member for inclusion.>

10 Additional sections

# Additional sections

<The EPA or persons entering into the proposal may include additional sections to address matters which have not been covered in subsequent sections. This may include, but is not limited to provisions for admissions of liability, cost recovery, special circumstances>

60


11 Declarations

I declare that I, <Name1>, as the authorised I declare that I, <Name2> was in the presence of representative of <company name> on their behalf <Name1> when this declaration was signed: agree to the provisions of this <VSCAP/VSRP> as defined under section <103I/K> of the Environment Protection Act 1993:

Signature: Signature:

Printed name: Printed name:

Date: Date:

61


Appendix A − Site map(s)

Appendix B − Schedule of works

Task Task objective Task scope Milestone/ Deliverable

Timing

Sampling analyses and quality plan (SAQP)

Provide guidance for the appropriate collection of environmental samples where required across the audit area in order to determine the nature and extent of site contamination present or remaining on or below the surface of the site.

Review previous investigations and identify data gaps that need addressing and to develop a preliminary CSM.

Auditor endorsed SAQP

X weeks from the commencement of the voluntary proposal.

Appendix C − Register of delay events

Delay event no.

Description Date notified

Work delayed Action proposed EPA Approved

Example Prolonged period of rainfall

30 June 2015

Drilling and installation of

Drilling rescheduled to mid-July and additional X weeks added to

Yes 7 July 2015

soil bores at site subsequent deliverables

Appendix D − Register of variations

Variation number

Description Date proposed Proposed by Date agreed Agreement attached

Example Expand audit area (Section 2.1)

30 June 2015 EPA 10 July 2015 Attachment 1 – Signed letter

Appendix E − Additional attachments

62


Appendix 2 Regulatory decision notice template

REGULATORY DECISION NOTICE (SITE CONTAMINATION)

GENERAL INFORMATION

File number: Enter file number

EPA coordinator: Choose name

Reason for RDN: <Select reason for RDN>

Ref Number:

Date of RDN:

Enter Geni number

Click here to enter a date.

SITE INFORMATION

Site name: Enter site name Site address: Address line 1

Suburb

State, Postcode

Liable person: Enter liable person Mail address: Address line 1

Site Owner: Enter site owner Suburb

State, Postcode

Certificate(s) of Enter CT title

CURRENT SITE CLASSIFICATION

PCA: Click here to enter text.

Potential human health exposure pathway: Select

Regulatory priority: Select

PCA Risk: Select PCA risk

Water and environment exposure pathway: Select

REGULATORY APPROACH

VSCAP

Non-statutory agreement

SCAO

Formal warning letter

No additional action (refer to previous RDN)

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐

VSRP

Show cause letter

SRO

No action

☐

☐

☐

☐

63


REGULATORY APPROACH COMMENTS

Add any additional comments or factors of significance relating to the above

CURRENT SITE STATUS

Assessment Choose assessment tier ☐ Remediation

Site contamination audit ☐ Site management plan

Regulatory endpoint reached ☐ Other

☐

☐

☐

SITE STATUS COMMENTS

Add any additional comments or factors of significance relating to the above

New information due: Click here to enter a date.

OTHER COMMENTS

Add any additional comments or factors of significance

PREVIOUS REGULATORY DECISIONS

Enter date of RDN Enter site classification

Enter regulator action taken Enter site status.

X X

Choose name

Site contamination coordinator Principal Adviser Site Contamination

Date: Date:

Attachments:

• site map(s)

• site data.

64


Appendix 3 – Potentially Contaminating Activity ranking

PCA title PCA description EPA assigned risk class

Abrasive blasting Operation of works for abrasive blast cleaning or disposal of abrasive blasting material (including mobile abrasive blasting works and abrasive blast cleaning carried out in fully enclosed booths but excluding abrasive blast cleaning undertaken for residential purposes)

Medium

Acid sulphate soil generation Oxidation of iron sulphide in potential acid sulphate soil material (sulphidic material) resulting in formation of actual acid sulphate soil material or sulphuric material

Low

Agricultural activities (burial of animals or parts of animals, burial of other waste, irrigation using wastewater, intensive application of listed substance − excluding routine spraying of pesticides used in broad scale farming)

Any of the following activities undertaken in the course of agriculture: (a) burial of animals or parts of animals; (b) burial of other waste; (c) irrigation using wastewater; (d) intensive application or administration of a listed substance [refer to Schedule 4 clause 3 of the EP Regulations] to animals, plants, land or water (excluding routine spraying, in accordance with manufacturers' instructions, of pesticides used in broad-acre farming)

Medium

Airports, aerodromes or aerospace industry

Operation of premises for commercial or charter aircraft takeoff and landing or manufacture, repair or maintenance of commercial or charter aircraft or aircraft equipment

High

Animal burial Burial of animals or parts of animals other than in the course of agriculture

Low

Animal dips or spray race facilities Operation of animal dips or spray race facilities Medium

Animal feedlots Operation of confined yards or areas for holding of animals and feeding of animals principally by mechanical means or by hand

Low

Animal saleyards Operation of yards at which cattle, sheep or other animals are gathered and confined for the purpose of their sale, auction or exchange (including associated transport loading facilities and associated wastewater disposal)

Low

Asbestos disposal Disposal of asbestos or asbestos products High

Asphalt or bitumen works Operation of works for manufacture of asphalt or bitumen High

Battery manufacture, recycling or disposal

Assembly, disassembly, manufacture or recycling of batteries (excluding storage of batteries for sale)

Medium

Breweries Production of beer by infusion, boiling or fermentation Low

Brickworks Production of bricks (including glazing of bricks) Low

65



Bulk shipping facilities (for bulk handling of agricultural crop products, rock, ores, minerals or liquid organic chemical substances to or from wharf or wharfside facility)

Operation of facilities for bulk handling of agricultural crop products, rock, ores, minerals or liquid organic chemical substances to or from wharf or wharfside facility (including sea-port grain terminals)

Medium

Cement works Operation of works for production of cement clinker or grinding of cement clinker using argillaceous and calcareous materials

Medium

Ceramic works Operation of works for manufacture of tiles, pipes, pottery goods, refractories or other ceramic products

Medium

Charcoal manufacture Manufacture of charcoal Low

Coal handling or storage Handling of coal, coke or carbonaceous material by any means or storage of coal, coke or carbonaceous reject material

Low

Coke works Production, quenching, cutting, crushing or grading of coke High

Compost or mulch manufacture or storage

Production or storage of compost, mulch or garden soils Low

Concrete batching works Operation of works for production of concrete or concrete products manufactured by inclusion of cement, sand, rock, aggregate or similar materials

Low

Curing or Drying works (operation of works for smoking, drying or curing meat, fish or other edible products by application of heat or smoke)

Operation of works for smoking, drying or curing meat, fish or other edible products by application of heat or smoke

Low

Defence works Operation of military defence establishments (including training areas)

High

Desalination plants Operation of desalination plants Low

Domestic - fill or soil importation Importation, to domestic premises, of soil or other fill originating from a site at which another potentially contaminating activity has taken place (not in the course of a business)

Medium

Domestic - liquid organic chemical substances - storage

Storage of more than 500 litres of liquid organic chemical substances (means oil, petroleum or biofuels, other than when stored in the fuel tank of a motor vehicle for the purposes of powering the vehicle) in underground or aboveground tanks or vessels at a discrete premises (excluding storage of oil for domestic heating at the premises)

High

66



Dredge spoil disposal or storage Disposal of dredge spoil onto land or storage of dredge spoil Medium

Drum re-conditioning or recycling works Operation of works for reconditioning or recycling of metal or plastic drums

High

Dry cleaning Operation of premises for dry cleaning High

Electrical or electronics component manufacture

Manufacture of electrical or electronics components High

Electrical substations Operation of electrical substations Medium

Electrical transformer or capacitor works Operation of works for manufacture, repair, storage or disposal of electrical transformers, capacitors or associated equipment or fluids

Medium

Electricity generation or power plants Operation of electricity generation or power plants Medium

Explosives or pyrotechnics facilities Operation of facilities for manufacture of explosives or pyrotechnics

High

Fertiliser manufacture Manufacture of agricultural fertiliser High

Fibreglass manufacture Manufacture of fibreglass products Medium

Fill or soil importation (importation, to premises of a business, of soil or other fill originating from a site at which another potentially contaminating activity has taken place)

Importation, to premises of a business, of soil or other fill originating from a site at which another potentially contaminating activity has taken place

Medium

Fire extinguisher or retardant manufacture

Manufacture of fire extinguishers or fire retardants High

Fire stations (underground storage of fuel)

Underground storage of fuel at fire stations High

Fire training areas Operation of premises for fire training involving the use of liquid fuel, fire accelerants, aqueous film forming foam or similar substances

Medium

Foundry Manufacture of metal products by injecting or pouring molten metal into moulds

High

Fuel burning facilities Burning of solid or liquid fuel (including for generation of power or steam at rate of heat release exceeding 1MW)

Low

Furniture restoration Restoration of furniture Medium

Gasworks Operation of gasworks or gas holders High

67



Glass works Operation of works for manufacture of glass products High

Glazing Glazing of ceramics or pottery Low

Hat manufacture or felt processing Manufacture of hats or processing of felt Low

Incineration Incineration within the meaning of Schedule 1 Part A clause 3(1) of the Act

Low

Iron or steel works Operation of works for manufacture of iron or steel High

Laboratories Operation of laboratories Medium

Landfill sites Operation of sites for disposal of waste onto or into land High

Lime burner Manufacture (by means of kiln) of cement or lime from limestone (including associated storage of waste)

Low

Manufacture, production (including as a byproduct or waste) or the recycling of a listed substance or a product containing a listed substances

manufacture, production (including as a byproduct or waste) or the recycling of a listed substance or a product containing a listed substance [refer to Schedule 4 clause 3 of the EP Regulations]

High

Metal coating, finishing or spray painting Finishing, treating or coating of metal (including anodising, galvanising, pickling, electroplating, heat treatment, powder coating, enamelling and spray painting)

High

Metal forging Forging of metal products Medium

Metal processing, smelting, refining or metallurgical works

Operation of works for melting (by means of furnace) of ferrous or non-ferrous metal or smelting or reduction of ores to produce metal

High

Mineral processing, metallurgical laboratories or extractive industries

Chemical or physical extraction or processing of metalliferous ores, storage of mining or exploration waste (for example, in tailings dams, overburden or waste rock dumps) mining or processing of minerals or operation of laboratories or pilot facilities for processing or testing of minerals

High

Mirror manufacture Manufacture of mirrors Medium

Motor vehicle manufacture Manufacture of motor vehicles High

Motor vehicle racing or testing venues Operation of facilities designed and used for motor vehicle competitions or motor vehicle speed or performance trials

Medium

Motor vehicle repair or maintenance Operation of premises for repair or maintenance of motor vehicles or parts of motor vehicles (including engine reconditioning works)

Medium

68



Motor vehicle wrecking yards Operation of yards for wrecking or dismantling of motor vehicles or parts of motor vehicles

Medium

Mushroom farming Farming of mushrooms Low

Oil recycling works Operation of works for recycling of oil High

Oil refineries Operation of works for refining of crude petroleum oil or shale High

Paint manufacture Manufacture (including blending, mixing and formulation) of paint

High

Pest control works Operation of premises for storage of pesticides or filling or washing of tanks used in pest control operations

High

Plastics manufacture works Operation of works for manufacture (including blending, mixing and formulation) of plastics or plastic components (excluding processing and moulding of plastics manufactured elsewhere)

High

Printing works Operation of printing works High

Pulp or paper works Operation of works for manufacture of timber pulp or paper Medium

Railway operations (within the meaning of Sch 1 Part Cl 7(2) of the Act)

Railway operations within the meaning of Schedule 1 Part A clause 7(2) of Act

High

Rubber manufacture or processing Manufacture or processing of rubber or rubber products High

Scrap metal recovery Recovery (including cleaning) of scrap metal Medium

Service stations Operation of retail fuel outlets High

Ship breaking Wrecking or dismantling of ships Medium

Spray Painting Spray painting other than spray painting of metal Medium

Storage at a discrete premises of a business of: a) 500 litres or more of a liquid listed substance or b) 500 kilograms or more of a listed substances other than a liquid

Storage at a discrete premises of a business of: a) 500 litres or more of a liquid listed substance [refer to Schedule 4 clause 3 of the EP Regulations] or b) 500 kilograms or more of a listed substance other than a liquid

High

Tannery, fellmongery or hide curing Operation of works for preservation or treatment of animal skins or hides

High

Textile operations Manufacture or dyeing of fabrics or materials Medium

69



Transport depots or loading sites Operation of transport depots or loading sites Medium

Tyre manufacture or retreading Manufacture or retreading of tyres High

Vermiculture Cultivation of earthworms for production of earthworms or earthworm castings

Low

Vessel construction, repair or maintenance

Operation of works or facilities (whether on water or land) for construction, repair or maintenance of vessels

Medium

Waste depots Reception, storage or treatment (including recycling) of waste or disposal of waste to land or water

High

Wastewater storage, treatment or disposal

Storage (including in tanks, lagoons and ponds) or treatment (including recycling) of wastewater or disposal of wastewater to land or water

Medium

Water discharge to underground aquifer Direct discharge of water from surface of land to underground aquifer

Medium

Wetlands or detention basins Operation of bodies of water less than 6 metres deep for collection and management of stormwater or other wastewater for urban amenity, flood mitigation or ecological or other environmental purposes

Medium

Wineries or distilleries Operation of works for processing grapes or other produce to make wine or spirits

Low

Wood preservative works Operation of works involving treatment or preservation of timber using chemicals

High

Woolscouring or wool carbonising works Operation of works involving cleaning or carbonising of wool other than in course of handicraft business where wool is further processed for retail sale

Medium

Works depots Operation of works depots by councils or utilities Medium

70

site contamination - regulatory and orphan site management ... · site contamination is an...

Documents